It always seemed like it'd be natural to lasso the Keyframes in the timeline, press cmd c, highlight another layer, place the play head, and press paste. Like most every application since 1984. Like AE. But for some reason in Motion I can't even get copy and paste Keyframes to work consistently in the Keyframe editor. I honestly don't know how to do it correctly obviously. Sometimes I try the menu copy. Sometimes cmd c. Sometimes I select the Keyframes and right click and copy. And then it's the same issue with paste. I'm trying some combination of the fore mentioned methods along with the same paste methods and sometimes nothing happens. Sometimes I find them on a completely different group or track. Something that should be so basic is for some reason ridiculously complicated or unnatural to me at least.

Still. How is it that the major top line feature of a full dot release is a livetype style crazy 3D type renderer?

If they ever did any market research, does anyone think that a mad 3D type engine was top of anyone's list? How many times have fans on here mentioned native cinema DNG? or improved audio handling? or roles based audio effects mapping? Or a more customisable interface? Or a timecode indicator that isn't the size of postage stamp rendered in a stupid digital font?

How in the hell did they come up with an overblown 3D type engine as their headline feature? how many use cases does that answer?

[Aindreas Gallagher]"If they ever did any market research, does anyone think that a mad 3D type engine was top of anyone's list? How many times have fans on here mentioned native cinema DNG? or improved audio handling? or roles based audio effects mapping? Or a more customisable interface? Or a timecode indicator that isn't the size of postage stamp rendered in a stupid digital font?
"

Seriously, did roles receive zero updates? Timeline markers? Anything at all changed with timecode support? They published some basic 3D tools from Motion (which is already built into FCPX as a headless engine) but neglected the way more useful tracking? There must just be one developer in a room somewhere clutching his sides and laughing right now, I'm fully ready for another one of those Downfall dubs. What a mess.

[Simon Ubsdell]"Indeed. What kind of sad has-been still thinks that 3D text is the cool happening thing? Or are Apple finally announcing that the done-to-death flat aesthetic is a thing of the past and we can all happily go back to the nineties?"

The latter.

"We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us."
- Marshall McLuhan

[Walter Soyka]"With good-looking 3D type easy to do, it will be done everywhere."

What should also be mentioned here, it that Apple in typical fashion have killed off the market for a high quality third party application in mObject. Because they always take such good care of third party developers ...

[Simon Ubsdell]"What should also be mentioned here, it that Apple in typical fashion have killed off the market for a high quality third party application in mObject."

No they haven't. The 3D stuff in X is really nice, but if you want to do anything other than text, you need mObject. mObject still gives you way more control over text, environments, surfaces etc. than the built in stuff.

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~

but charlie - why in the hell are we here talking about 3D type?Three dimensional bloody type??? For a premier dot release front in line FCPX feature?

charlie, just, come on: I mean, I can't... god almighty

we're having a conversation about the headline 3D type feature. Read that sentence back charlie. they couldn't even figure out native cinema DNG? How in the hell could they not manage that? Inside a year? Is it slated for 2017 after they introduce full smiley face emojis to the type engine?

[Aindreas Gallagher]"we're having a conversation about the headline 3D type feature. Read that sentence back charlie."

You're talking about 3D text. We could just as easily talk about the ability to save effects/grades etc as effects presets, or the new masks, or the keyframing improvements, or the performance bumps, or the scopes, or the optical flow, or the dual GPU RED RAW processing, or the new camera formats they do support.

But what fun would that be? Personally I'm looking forward to animating my cats mouth in the new version of Pr. For my YouTube channel.

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~

Come on Charlie - Apple is the one deciding to talk about 3D text at the front of dot one release. Not me.

that is their headline disrupter for NAB. 3D text charlie. FCPX now boasts that to the world. After twelve months Apple FCPX development - witness the glory that is a 3D text module. As their dot one headline feature.

tell me your head didn't drop when you saw that list. You won't but I really really bet it did.

[Aindreas Gallagher]"tell me your head didn't drop when you saw that list. You won't but I really really bet it did."

Well, I actually kept reading the list. Seriously, it's like saying that the only thing in the yet to be released update to Pr is the ability to animate a cartoon.

FWIW, every title we make, usually in AE, is 3D, even if it's basically flat. I can now make titles in X's built in title tool that look just as good. It's gonna free up the gfx guy to do the more convoluted stuff...

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~

I like the humor. But they 3D module they've built is actually easiest to implement on text because it's tailor-made vector paths. And there is already a camera and light built in. It appears to me that a 3D Module is here in X. That's pretty friggin awesome iff it moves beyond text extrusion and the camera includes tracking. That's what 10.2.5?

What I mean is: the demo I saw the guys were in X (not in Motion). Granted editors can jump to Motion for refinement and publish back to X. I think that's pretty huge really: a 3D module built into the NLE. I don't plan to use it because it's text only. But still...a 3D module in the NLE is pretty cool. I hope it grows up.

[Richard Herd]"What I mean is: the demo I saw the guys were in X (not in Motion). Granted editors can jump to Motion for refinement and publish back to X. I think that's pretty huge really: a 3D module built into the NLE. I don't plan to use it because it's text only. But still...a 3D module in the NLE is pretty cool. I hope it grows up.
"

Understood... My point, such as it is... is that it's basically the same module. So I can see them adding to the FCP X version, or at least making it available somehow without switching apps. Same with the new masks. Same as Motion, but without the tracking etc.

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~

what? so they can try what autodesk failed to do two years ago with smoke? Do you really think Apple have the team to land that? And we're talking about this off a lunatic live type boris red 3D type hail mary inclusion to validate a dot release?

does anyone on this forum today think apple are going to follow through on any of that? Realistically?

[Aindreas Gallagher]"what? so they can try what autodesk failed to do two years ago with smoke? Do you really think Apple have the team to land that? And we're talking about this off a lunatic live type boris red 3D type hail mary inclusion to validate a dot release?

does anyone on this forum today think apple are going to follow through on any of that? Realistically?"

Forgive me, but the only image that keeps popping into my head is that of Ignatius J. Reilly. :-)

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~

[Aindreas Gallagher]"so they can try what autodesk failed to do two years ago with smoke? Do you really think Apple have the team to land that? And we're talking about this off a lunatic live type boris red 3D type hail mary inclusion to validate a dot release?

does anyone on this forum today think apple are going to follow through on any of that? Realistically?"

[Charlie Austin]"Personally I'm looking forward to animating my cats mouth in the new version of Pr. For my YouTube channel."

I know you're kidding, but character animation is a totally valid use of Ae, and Character Animator is a promising tool which certainly took nothing away from Pr's development.

Look at the hoops people have been jumping through to do character animation in Ae before [link], then let's discuss again if Character Animator is on par with 3D text in Motion (which again, for the record, I think is a positive thing).

[Simon Ubsdell]"What should also be mentioned here, it that Apple in typical fashion have killed off the market for a high quality third party application in mObject. Because they always take such good care of third party developers ..."

I see both sides of this argument, as the Ae team has historically gone the other way -- they'll avoid developing a feature if it's already been done by a third party, even if it SHOULD be part of the application.

This is a mixed blessing: sometimes it costs users features that they expect or that could be better implemented as first-party solutions than third-party solutions, but on the other hand, it's also great for users because it leads to a very robust third-party ecosystem.

[Walter Soyka]"With good-looking 3D type easy to do, it will be done everywhere."

The issue is how the heck are they gonna match a brand among web, print, video. The only easy to do 3D type is in video? And here I'm assuming the flat aesthetic has some utility because it loads quickly on a smart phone.

the thing I find weird about it is that it feels like a touch ID Siri style feature. That Apple were motivated to produce something as a new nick nack to refresh public expectations? But this isn't an iphone right? What public are they speaking to?

it's supposed to be a professional editing system. How did they choose to pour resources into what I'm sure is a well developed 3D type engine, rather than say answering audio handling, customisability or God knows how many other things that have been signalled to them through back channels over the last 12 odd months?

who are Apple actually making this for? Who is supposed to be excited about that shot of new york with a 3D Times Roman Type sitting on it? Does this feature signal Apple's intent in the core edit markets they foresee for FCPX? What in the hell are those markets? Who are those people?

I think that has to be the craziest headline feature for an occasionally moribund professional editing software development team ever seen. it nearly feels perverse.

"And the features that high end customers need are often very very unsexy. They don’t look particularly good in a demo. See, here’s the thing with how features happen at Apple to a great extent – product development is often driven by how well things can be demoed. Maybe not explicitly – nobody ever told me to only design features that demoed well – but the nature of the organization effectively makes it work out that way. Because a lot of decisions about product direction make their way very far up the management hierarchy .... And so the first question that comes up is ‘how are we going to show this feature within the company?’ All the mid-level managers know that they’re going to have a limited window of time to convey what makes a product or a feature special to their bosses. So they either 1) make a sexy demo or 2) spend a lot of time trying to explain why some customer feels that some obscure feature is worth implementing. Guess which strategy works best?"

I kind of just can't get over it - I was actually sort of excited to think what they were brewing? they've come out with some stuff - like multi-cam and that. or the whole native CC they half turned over.

one way or another this really has to mean X is pages - it's just floating steady state in the apple software pond until they decide to blow it up again.

that felt like the FCP7 coloured markers release.
There's just no way, off the back of that, that they're not looking at the cloud for ecosystem video ala photos killing iphoto and aperture.
It's hard not to think FCPX is a dead man walking in a way. They're definitely not concerned with driving it in competition with Pr and Avid. not with the zany 3D type reveal to the world. It's a bit of a shame in a way.

3D text is is the first non-pro specific dedicated feature (and I think it will see a lot of use in circles of working professionals) to appear in an update in YEARS. And you're going to lay them out for it. How about:

[Marcus Moore]"This is so unbelievable, but then again not for you Aindreas. 3D text is is the first non-pro specific dedicated feature (and I think it will see a lot of use in circles of working professionals) to appear in an update in YEARS. And you're going to lay them out for it"

I think it's a solid update, but Aindreas has a point, too. Look how Apple is promoting the update:

3D titles is above the fold. It's clearly a feature that's meant to demo fast and well and sell new copies of FCPX, but is it actually a daily use item? If so, what is Apple-as-auteur saying about FCP X? If not, was it a good use of development time?

(I know subscription isn't popular here, but this is an area where I think subscription aligns developers with users: keeping your existing users happy is just as important as acquiring new ones. Since marketing and development are largely inseparable, this means altering your product design priorities.)

While I'm happy to see Motion get a little love, I bet nearly everyone on this forum would have gladly diverted the development time that went into 3D titles toward a roles mixer or send to Motion.

[Marcus Moore]"Color and Shape qualifiers for ALL effects layers (this is huge)"

Yes, this is a really big and no one has discussed yet.

A boring, little feature that doesn't demo well and looks lame on the new features list, but packs huge power and that will get used every day. My favorite kind!

I think you're exactly right- 3D text is a good visual demo so it gets top billing on the page- it is what it is. But trying to build any larger case from that is folly.

One more consumer oriented feature at the top of a What's New page after 4 years of professionally focused feature improvements (including lots in the current release) is just giving 3D text too much weight- by a LONG shot.

[Walter Soyka]" I bet nearly everyone on this forum would have gladly diverted the development time that went into 3D titles toward a roles mixer or send to Motion."

It seems like every "missing" feature/update being lamented here is related in some way to the timeline and/or Projects. In the last "point" versions Apple have updated The Browser ( 10.1-Libraries etc), the Inspector/Effects (10.2-FxPlug, Performance etc).

Not much has happened to the timeline. Do you think they're just ignoring what is likely the biggest bit to revamp? I don't.

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~

[Charlie Austin]"t seems like every "missing" feature/update being lamented here is related in some way to the timeline and/or Projects. In the last "point" versions Apple have updated The Browser ( 10.1-Libraries etc), the Inspector/Effects (10.2-FxPlug, Performance etc). Not much has happened to the timeline. Do you think they're just ignoring what is likely the biggest bit to revamp? I don't."

(I mentioned in another thread, you can extend this functionality a bit yourself: create a font with your logo, vector shape, etc., then extrude and treat your "text" in Motion.)

Walter Soyka

How exactly does one DO that, Walter? Sounds like a fun hack.

Meanwhile, in the column designated "not sexy but useful every day", I am sorry they did not move the ball forward on closed captioning. There is a lot of programming and commercials being made, that by law needs to be captioned, and most methods used to do it are horrible kludges that take agonizing amounts of time to implement. One company holds a huge monopoly on the way captioning is done, and I don't think that's fair to the hearing-impaired community or to us folks trying to serve them.

But there's another side of easy and cheap captioning that should make it something on everyone's wish list; when you have good captioning that's easy to do, all the spoken words in your programming become easy to keyword search, not just on your own NLE, as a workflow improvement tool, but out in the world, when the programming is released; those cc files become a searchable transcript available to the world thru google and yahoo. Finding quotes and finding shots will advance exponentially.

So I beg those fine developers in Cupertino and elsewhere, please get cracking on a native closed captioning functionality within FCPX, and you'll find a lot of institutional users will start specifying purchase of this NLE by name.

[Charlie Austin]"Because you can't take a pretty picture of the performance improvements which were done. Or the enhanced FxPlug and fcpxml functionality. That stuff alone is worth the full dot release number."

Great to see that Apple have finally given us ...

Playhead Sync Replace Edit

Gang Sync

Multiple persistent timecode displays (that actually show you the right TC most of the time)

I for one have never asked for one single thing you mentioned. The absolute number one missing thing is Motion integration in my book. Hands down. Didn't get it. But I think they've made some inroads in that area and I wouldn't be surprised to see something like that in a 10.2.2 release after a bug fix release.

I will leave the blabber about titles to those who have the time for this, but in the meantime we have been testing native R3D and MXF performance. Real-time full debayer playback (Best Quality settings) with native R3D at any size with multiple streams is pretty impressive.

We have also tested a 50-minute 12-angle 1080p25 native MXF multicam timeline streamed from a TB RAID on a maxed out iMac running 10.1.4 and we got spinning beach balls after 1 hour. Had to restart the app to get things smooth again. Ran the same test with 10.2 and the thing has been running for 5 hours now without any issues. Pretty impressive as well. Been screen recording the tests, will publish them on FCP.co.

My friends at Metronome in Denmark have been testing 10.2 with 20 editors working on the same media at the same time via their new shared storage system. They are absolutely thrilled about the performance boost. Will publish an article about this very soon now.

[Ronny Courtens]"We have also tested a 50-minute 12-angle 1080p25 native MXF multicam timeline streamed from a TB RAID on a maxed out iMac running 10.1.4 and we got spinning beach balls after 1 hour. Had to restart the app to get things smooth again. Ran the same test with 10.2 and the thing has been running for 5 hours now without any issues."

Performance is a creative feature. "Works like it's supposed to" doesn't look great on the tin, but this is exactly the kind of development that everyday users need. I'm glad to see this happening in CC, and I'm glad to see it happening here.

"What kind of sad has-been still thinks that 3D text is the cool happening thing?"

According to Apple's info, 65% of FCP X users use it for making their final titles. 3D text templates were added to enhance the process for these users. It's actually pretty sweet for editors (think local market retail, for example) who want a bit of glitz built in. After all, there's Style and Chrominator ;-)

On a more serious note, there are a lot of under-the-hood improvements that hopefully will pay off in performance improvements. In my case, it's next week before I can test that (after NAB). Other items include improved RED support, anamorphic detection/correction, color board changes, and custom effects presets saving.

In Compressor, there's a new preset for iTunes packages. There's a clearly a vision within Apple for innovative filmmakers to use FCP X and distribute via iTunes. This feature is designed to make that easier, although you still want to go to iTunes through one of their third-party portals.

I know a lot of people wanted more, but it seems clear that Apple feels pretty comfortable with the basic model as is. At least for now.

Meanwhile, Resolve 12 looks good, too. Editing performance seems better in the demos than R11, but we'll see for real, when it gets out into the wild. Personally I'd still want to use a different tool for long-form, creative editing, but others may be happy with R12 as their only tool. At least the BMD vision supports it as a finishing tool when compositing is at a minimum. I think it's now moved to editing and grading tool, rather than a grading tool that *can* edit.

[Oliver Peters]"According to Apple's info, 65% of FCP X users use it for making their final titles. 3D text templates were added to enhance the process for these users. It's actually pretty sweet for editors (think local market retail, for example) who want a bit of glitz built in."

Yes, indeed. I suspect these guys will be graduating to 3D Text straight away:

[Simon Ubsdell]"I can't imagine what Apple thought they were doing giving us all that flat rubbish - obviously a crazy rush of blood to the head. So glad to see they've come to their senses.
"

lol. Look, I don't think the 3D stuff is a big deal. The other stuff that's been done to the guts of the app is what makes me happy. I'm just saying that it's not useless. Whether one approves of the aesthetic or not.

[Simon Ubsdell]"I'm not difficult - I just want the things that I want, and I don't give a damn about the stuff that other people want that I don't want! What's unreasonable about that?"

Nothing at all. I'm just a Pollyanna - I think FCP X is perfect just as it is, Every time Apple adds anything to it I am thrilled and can think of nothing more they could do... and then they do something else! I love them. Nothing wrong with that is there?

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to work. Pr and FCP 7 for me today! They too are perfect apps! I am full of love!
;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~

[Walter Soyka]"Performance is a creative feature. "Works like it's supposed to" doesn't look great on the tin, but this is exactly the kind of development that everyday users need. I'm glad to see this happening in CC, and I'm glad to see it happening here."

well said...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill

[Ronny Courtens]"We have also tested a 50-minute 12-angle 1080p25 native MXF multicam timeline streamed from a TB RAID on a maxed out iMac running 10.1.4 and we got spinning beach balls after 1 hour. Had to restart the app to get things smooth again. Ran the same test with 10.2 and the thing has been running for 5 hours now without any issues. Pretty impressive as well. Been screen recording the tests, will publish them on FCP.co. "

overall, you'd have to say the ability to functionally play 1080P multi-cam video for an extended period after the dot one release re-start sounds right on the money. throw some headline 3D titles in the mix and then you've got a veritable next gen casserole.

[Ronny Courtens]"We have also tested a 50-minute 12-angle 1080p25 native MXF multicam timeline streamed from a TB RAID on a maxed out iMac running 10.1.4 and we got spinning beach balls after 1 hour. Had to restart the app to get things smooth again. Ran the same test with 10.2 and the thing has been running for 5 hours now without any issues. Pretty impressive as well. Been screen recording the tests, will publish them on FCP.co.
"

Just curious Ronny, but what MXF are you using? 10.2 blew a hole in our workflow as it now rewraps MXF to MOV (ugh) on import. There's no option to leave in place.

You can drag/drop MXF in and it works like in 10.1.4, but using the import window results in a rewrap.

I can manually dig out the plugin, and the rewrapping goes away, but that seems crazy to do across all installs.

Do you use Sony XDCam or XAVC MXF files from cards/disc?

I'll admit, I'm a little mad at this one. It took soooo loooong for Apple to embrace MXF and now the importer rewraps to mov. I'm hoping it's an oversight.

I had removed the PDZK plugin because it was causing conflicts when importing F-55 footage. So the tests were done without the plugin. We are getting Leave Files in Place when importing from card (XDCAM HD 422 MXF) and we can work with MXF as we did before. Only faster now.

[Ronny Courtens]"I had removed the PDZK plugin because it was causing conflicts when importing F-55 footage. So the tests were done without the plugin. We are getting Leave Files in Place when importing from card (XDCAM HD 422 MXF) and we can work with MXF as we did before. Only faster now."

Ronny, thanks for the response.

And this is with 10.2? The Sony downloaded PDZK ins't on my machines, but there is an "XDCam" plugin within the FCPX application that seems to be the culprit (which is new, and a feature that Apple has added in 10.2, according to the release notes).

Are you saying you removed this supplied plugin manually or that you "uninstalled" the one from Sony?

[Ronny Courtens]"I had removed the PDZK plugin because it was causing conflicts when importing F-55 footage. So the tests were done without the plugin. We are getting Leave Files in Place when importing from card (XDCAM HD 422 MXF) and we can work with MXF as we did before. Only faster now."

Yeah, the type is silly. Perhaps you're missing the obvious: a built-in 3D module with cameras and lights is not silly. The feature needs to grow beyond text and include tracking, and I predict that's where the puck will be.

Some folks have mentioned the affect this update will have on 3rd party developers such as Mobject but lets spare a thought for Coremelt who have just had the legs cut off their SliceX plugin with most of the functionality having been replicated by the masks update included in 10.2.

However as demonstrated in Ripple Trainings overview of this update Apple's offering relies on manual tracking and adjustment of masks through keyframes, whereas with Slice X, powered by Mocha, you just draw a shape and hit track.

Very… snappy. There have been some legitimate past gripes about slow/stuttery UI, memory leakage, slowdowns, and just general sluggishness with certain projects. In some cases even crusty old FCP 7 felt more responsive than X. Well, that is no more. Done.

I hear you. At least the voice inside my head would quit saying, "Hey now! There is always Resolve after all, deal with it!" Apple, please add support for Cinema DNG raw, don't feel like seeing the psychiatrist or going to the nut house.

Yeah, I use Resolve to convert and do basic color temp and exposure, transcode to ProRes and export for FCPX editing.

With Apple's focus on evolving the color board, masks etc., all the more reason why I'm sure many of us would like the option of the simplified workflow, staying within X for a lot/most work.
With that in mind it would be nice to add temp control to the color board if they decide to support DNG.

I'm thinking maybe more of us produce in Cinema DNG than, say, Red at this point?

But much of Apple's FCPX market shoots with Black Magic Cameras (we do) and much of their market aren't dedicated editors but people that do full production (we do.)

I'd bet that day to day, more people using FCPX are working in footage from BM cameras than Red. It's become a more affordable and common means of capture, like the democratization of X and Motion for a few bucks at the App store.

Again maybe not for editing facilities but definitely for independents and small shops, and that's the core of their demo.

[Jim Giberti]"But much of Apple's FCPX market shoots with Black Magic Cameras (we do) and much of their market aren't dedicated editors but people that do full production (we do.)

I'd bet that day to day, more people using FCPX are working in footage from BM cameras than Red. It's become a more affordable and common means of capture, like the democratization of X and Motion for a few bucks at the App store.

Again maybe not for editing facilities but definitely for independents and small shops, and that's the core of their demo."

Perhaps. I really have no idea what the bulk of FCPX users, dedicated editors or not, shoot or edit with. My guess would be some sort of Canon or Panasonic Gh4/DSLR varietal, and ProRes.

I haven't seen a BM camera in the wild. We are full service production, and hire a smattering of DPs, I don't know anyone that uses it is all I'm saying. I don't know how high on the list CinemaDNG is. It seems like Blackmagic could be able to write their own import plugin and codec, just like Red does, but who knows?

[Jeremy Garchow]"I haven't seen a BM camera in the wild. We are full service production, and hire a smattering of DPs, I don't know anyone that uses it is all I'm saying."

I know a handful of folks who use BMD cameras for corporate work, including me from time to time. But these cameras seem to be more popular with indie filmmakers. Even then, I think most people shoot Prores though. I think you might see greater uptake of the Ursa Mini. If the 4.6k model ships on time with few issues, I think it has the potential to dominate it's niche.

[Jeremy Garchow]" I don't know how high on the list CinemaDNG is. It seems like Blackmagic could be able to write their own import plugin and codec, just like Red does, but who knows?"

Cinema DNG is an open standard though. It seems weird to my that Apple doesn't support it.

[Shawn Miller]"But these cameras seem to be more popular with indie filmmakers"

So is FCPX popular with indie film makers, and does that make up a bulk of Apple's users, do you think?

[Shawn Miller]"Cinema DNG is an open standard though. It seems weird to my that Apple doesn't support it."

MXF is an open source standard, too. It took FOREVA for Apple to support MXF. I think that if BM really wanted to, they could write an importer and make it happen. Instead, they are writing their own edit and color correction tool with full support.

And by the way, just for the record, most people I talk to around town, and the people that they talk to, are going with Pr CC. Everyone looks at me like I'm that guy that actually likes FCPX. It's allright, i can take it. :)

I do feel like part of the motivation is from a comfort zone of an easier transition from the Legend of FCP, which is understandable. Colorists, the pros, are moving away from Resolve it seems, and going to Baselight. I get the sense that some of them are kinda pissed/unsure about the acquisition of DaVinci by decklink, inc.

[Jeremy Garchow]"[Shawn Miller] "But these cameras seem to be more popular with indie filmmakers"

So is FCPX popular with indie film makers, and does that make up a bulk of Apple's users, do you think?"

Yes, I see a lot of FCPX users on the BMD forums. I get the sense that most of them are debayering their raw footage in Resolve though. Lightroom seems to be a popular option for doing this as well.

[Jeremy Garchow]"MXF is an open source standard, too. It took FOREVA for Apple to support MXF. I think that if BM really wanted to, they could write an importer and make it happen. Instead, they are writing their own edit and color correction tool with full support."

Yeah... truthfully, I thought that was strange too.... that and image sequences, seem like odd things to leave out support for.

I don't disagree that Blackmagic could probably write a cDNG importer for FCPX... but so could Digital Bolex or Kinefinity. But why would they do that? Apple has way more engineering resources than any of them.

[Jeremy Garchow]"And by the way, just for the record, most people I talk to around town, and the people that they talk to, are going with Pr CC. Everyone looks at me like I'm that guy that actually likes FCPX. It's allright, i can take it. :)"

lol - I sympathize completely. I was using Vegas years before a lot of editors even knew what it was... it didn't do a lot for my street cred. :-)

[Shawn Miller]"I don't disagree that Blackmagic could probably write a cDNG importer for FCPX... but so could Digital Bolex or Kinefinity. But why would they do that? Apple has way more engineering resources than any of them."

It's true, but that's like saying Adobe should write all their own filter plugins and not rely on third parties.

There's an actual camera importer API that Apple has created. There's a new format that comes out nearly every day. I can see Apple's stance. Avid has somewhat offloaded this responsibility too, with AMA.

[Jeremy Garchow]"Well, shoot. Street cred's all we have in the post game! hahaha!"

No doubt. :-)

[Jeremy Garchow]"
It's true, but that's like saying Adobe should write all their own filter plugins and not rely on third parties.

There's an actual camera importer API that Apple has created. There's a new format that comes out nearly every day. I can see Apple's stance. Avid has somewhat offloaded this responsibility too, with AMA."

I see your point. Still, it does seem odd for Apple to depend on a direct competitor to add support for an open format. If the BMD cameras shot in TIFF sequences, would you feel the same way?

I went to a demo at NAB today and I could easily see FCPX becoming very popular with ad agencies and even in the TV promo world. The big question is, as it always is in a business environment, will Apple all of the sudden decide to bail?

[TImothy Auld]"The big question is, as it always is in a business environment, will Apple all of the sudden decide to bail?
"

How many weird half baked permutations of Avid were EOL'd suddenly? Several off the top of my head. At a former place I work at the owner bought several Mojo's just a couple months before they killed support.

Seeing how FCP 7 still somehow manages to work in Yosemite five years after it's last update and the remaining six years left of the promised development cycle for FCPX, I'd say people are safe giving FCP X a go.

You have had a good experience running FCP 7 in Yosemite? All I've heard are horror stories. And Apple does have a monumentally bad reputation in the business world. There simply is no question about that.

All of the business world that is wary of forced upgrades, sudden EOL's and a general problem with Apple's not giving a damn about any consequence the same might cause. So, pretty much all of the business world.

I pads are a convenient ancillary tool that some business people use and are inexpensive enough that even if the employer has purchased them for employees they relatively inexpensive and are easily replaceable. But when was the last time you walked into a Fortune 500 company and saw a whole bunch of Mac's computers lined up? My guess is never.

Apple has very little penetration in the enterprise market. I know this for a fact. They has about 8% of global enterprise spending on computers and hand held devices, the vast majority of that being devices.

My question still stands. Where are you getting your information? Personal observation? If so, that's cool, but needs to be taken in context. No biggie, just when broad statements like that are made, it's interesting to find out the source.

Are you kidding me? Your citation is that you see a sh*t ton of ipads out there and you are taxing me about my sources? It is well known that Apple has never made inroads in Enterprise. They don't want too. They do pretty well without it. But are you seriously telling me that Apple does have Enterprise penetration? Everyone knows that they do not. My sources are the New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, PC Magazine and a hundred others. What are your sources that tell me they do. Oh wait - you don't have any, do you?

[TImothy Auld]"Apple has very little penetration in the enterprise market. I know this for a fact. They has about 8% of global enterprise spending on computers and hand held devices, the vast majority of that being devices.
"

I do a lot of work with IBM who have recently partnered with Apple to develop enterprise Apps, apparently it's going very well.

Since BYOD has started becoming prevalent I have noticed that there are more iPads and MacBooks than ever in the businesses I visit.

In our organization everyone wants Macs, but the IT department doesn't allow them to get Macs without some sort of special exemption. Our floor, communications, is the only one that gets Macs. Everyone is jealous of us.

The real stranglehold is IT departments trying to make life easy for themselves, if it were based on efficiency and the desire of the actual workers there would be a different reality.

[Brett Sherman]"The real stranglehold is IT departments trying to make life easy for themselves, if it were based on efficiency and the desire of the actual workers there would be a different reality."

Well... to be fair. IT is a difficult, expensive, mission critical, thankless job that the average worker doesn't understand. Have you actually asked the people responsible for deploying and maintaining your systems why it's such a big deal to support Macs in the fleet? I know some companies support heterogeneous computing environments really well, others just don't have the bandwidth or expertise. Maybe your IT department has legitimate reasons for trying to keep their users on as few platforms as possible.

[Steve Connor]"[TImothy Auld] "Apple has very little penetration in the enterprise market. I know this for a fact. They has about 8% of global enterprise spending on computers and hand held devices, the vast majority of that being devices.
"

I do a lot of work with IBM who have recently partnered with Apple to develop enterprise Apps, apparently it's going very well.

Since BYOD has started becoming prevalent I have noticed that there are more iPads and MacBooks than ever in the businesses I visit."

Yeah, that's pretty standard for IBM. They're using Apple in the same way they used Red Hat in the mid 2000's - to compete with MS and partners in the datacenter. In this case, they're getting into banking, retail and airlines with solutions for mobile using Apple hardware. Those are huge opportunities, and some companies are doing big business there already. Regarding hardware, Apple is still a pretty minor player there. There are more Macs in the enterprise to be sure, but it's still over 90% Windows "out there". BYOD has actually been a good thing for MS, because it strengthens their cloud and SaaS story. Anywhere, anytime, any device. When you log into Lync, Exchange, Office 365 or OneDrive, MS doesn't necessarily care what your OS is... they care that you're logging into Lync, Exchange, Office 365 or OneDrive. :-)

Oh my goodness, Scott - what happened to you? I thought you saw a sh*t ton of ipads our there in the business world and that proved that Apple was - at least - coming up in that world. What happened? Did you find out that Apple has no more than 8% penetration in the enterprise world? And did you just decide not to acknowledge that point?

[TImothy Auld]"Did you find out that Apple has no more than 8% penetration in the enterprise world? "

We are veering wildly OT here! :-)

Here is another quote from you: " And Apple does have a monumentally bad reputation in the business world. "
You changed from reputation to marketshare. Which one is it? Marketshare and reputation are two different things. One is qualitative, the other quantitative. My sources are simply observation, I admit. But there are a few articles out there to support it.

[Scott Witthaus]"[TImothy Auld] "Did you find out that Apple has no more than 8% penetration in the enterprise world? "

We are veering wildly OT here! :-)

Here is another quote from you: " And Apple does have a monumentally bad reputation in the business world. "
You changed from reputation to marketshare. Which one is it? Marketshare and reputation are two different things. One is qualitative, the other quantitative. My sources are simply observation, I admit. But there are a few articles out there to support it.

Yeah, those were great attention getting headlines two years ago. Since then however, PC sales have stabilized while tablet sales have slowed. BYOD has undoubtedly brought more iPads into the enterprise, but they really haven't (as predicted) become the device of choice for the mobile worker. I know a few large enterprise businesses in town where, people can choose between devices (Mac or PC, tablet or notebook)... most are choosing Windows 8 on a notebook. Where you might see iPads deployed in a real business environment, are as part of some kind of "solution", like a point of sale application, or as part of a customer relationship management system, but you're just as likely (if not more) to see Windows devices in those same scenarios.

Wildly off topic or not, yes, your sources are only observation. Mine are quite easily looked up on many trusted sources. 8% is the long view of Apple's foray into the business world. Not a single one of the links you included in your last post dispute that in any way. Stop the professorial BS and admit that Apple has no more than 8% Enterprise use anywhere in the world. Everyone, except you, seems to know this.

To clarify, my main point is that it's been five years since 'legacy' FCP development stopped, yet it is still functional after four new 10.x releases. A half a decade and it still works is hardly Apple 'suddenly pulling the plug'.

It's worked fine for me opening archived feature film projects and cleaning them up for getting them into FCP X. It's 3rd party plugins that are no longer compatible with the OS that are often the problem.

Installing Yosemite over an existing OS with FCP 7 installed can be a problem for some, but it works fine with a fresh install.

I noticed the faster performance as well, Tony, but find it hard to be thrilled about it because it should have been there much earlier. It's 2015 and I've been running on a near-top-of-the-line system and X was laggy when working on 3 min projects with a couple of prores layers. Just inexcusable.

That Apple finally fixed it doesn't take away from the shamefulness of Apple releasing the last crippled version and leaving users with it for months. I really wonder if Apple can be trusted. Where are the high standards Apple used to have?